Johnson Elec. Co. v. Salce Contracting Assocs., Inc., 812 A.2d 864 (Conn. 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
Johnson Elec. Co. v. Salce Contracting Assocs., Inc., 812 A.2d 864 (Conn. 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
88 citation events (88 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Quintiliano (connappct, 2021-08-17)
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Quintiliano
Conn. App. Ct. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
Lisiewski v. Seidel, 72 Conn. App. 861, 870 , 806 A.2d 1121 ; see id., 870–71 (in case involving property dispute, when deed at issue contained clear and unam- biguous language, trial court’s determination that plain- tiff’s expert witness testified credibly regarding latent ambiguity in deed did not restrict this court’s plenary review of legal questions regarding proper construction of deeds), cert. denied, 262 Conn. 921 , 812 A.2d 865 (2002), and cert. denied, 262 Conn. 922 , 812 A.2d 865 (2002).
discussed Cited "see" Cenatiempo v. Bank of America, N.A. (2×)
Conn. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
Specifically, they allege that, by ‘‘capitaliz- ing inflated past due interest along with attorney’s fees and costs, the defendant ultimately profits from the excessive delay at the cost of the consumer through servicing fees.’’ It is well settled that a ‘‘trade practice that is undertaken to maximize the defendant’s profit at the expense of the plaintiff’s rights comes under the second prong of the cigarette rule.’’ Votto v. American Car Rental, Inc., 273 Conn. 478, 485 , 871 A.2d 981 (2005); see Johnson Electric Co. v. Salce Contracting Associates, Inc., 72 Conn. App. 3…
cited Cited "see" Caminis v. Troy
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Franc v. Bethel Holding Co., 73 Conn. App. 114, 145 , 807 A.2d 519 , cert. granted on other grounds, 262 Conn. 923 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002) (appeal withdrawn October 21, 2003).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Sanseverino
Conn. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Franc v. Bethel Holding Co., 73 Conn. App. 114, 150 , 807 A.2d 519 (Schaller, J., dissenting) (disagreeing with majority opinion and noting that parties at least should be allowed to file supplemental briefs), cert. granted, 262 Conn. 923 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002) (appeal withdrawn October 21, 2003).
discussed Cited "see" Votto v. American Car Rental, Inc. (2×)
Conn. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Johnson Electric Co. v. Salce Contracting Associates, Inc., 72 Conn. App. 342, 357 , 805 A.2d 735 (defendant general contractor held hable for CUTPA violation under second prong of cigarette rule after listing plaintiff subcontractor as successful bidder but failing to honor contract), cert. denied, 262 Conn. 922 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002).
discussed Cited "see" Miller v. Town of Westport
Conn. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Franc v. Bethel Holding Co., 73 Conn. App. 114 , 146 n.l, 807A.2d519 (Schaller,J., dissenting), cert. granted on other grounds, 262 Conn. 923 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002) (appeal withdrawn October 21, 2003).
discussed Cited "see" Hart v. Carruthers (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Johnson Electric Co. v. Salce Contracting Associates, Inc., 72 Conn. App. 342, 344 , 805 A.2d 735 , cert. denied, 262 Conn. 922 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002).
discussed Cited "see" Larobina v. Home Depot, USA, Inc. (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Johnson Electric Co. v. Salce Contracting Associates, Inc., 72 Conn. App. 342, 348 , 805 A.2d 735 , cert. denied, 262 Conn. 922 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Miller v. Fishman
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Franc v. Bethel Holding Co., 73 Conn. App. 114, 132, 807 A.2d 519 , cert. granted on other grounds, 262 Conn. 923 , 812 A.2d 864 (2002) (appeal withdrawn October 21, 2003); see also Practice Book § 10-60. 5 The court’s discretion, however, is not unfettered; it is a legal discretion subject to review.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Mohican Valley Concrete Corp. v. Zoning Board of Appeals (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
We hold, therefore, that the specific inclusion of automobile dealerships in § 27 indicates that § 21.4 was not intended to include automobiles within the term “merchandise.” “It is a well-settled principle of [statutory] construction that specific terms covering the given subject matter will prevail over general language of the same or another statute which might otherwise prove controlling.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Truelove & Maclean, Inc., 238 Conn. 337, 346 , 680 A.2d 1261 (1996); see also Johnson Electric Co. v. Salce Con…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
JOHNSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.
v.
SALCE CONTRACTING ASSOCIATES, INC.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Dec 13, 2002.
812 A.2d 864
Paul A. Sobel, in support of the petition., Maximino Medina, Jr., and Anthony R. Minchella, in opposition.
Published

No opinion found.Click here to view source material.